|
In order to ensure that this thread meets TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we ask that everyone please adhere to this mod note. Posts containing only Tweets or articles adds nothing to the discussions. Therefore, when providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments will be actioned upon. All in all, please continue to enjoy posting in TL General and partake in discussions as much as you want! But please be respectful when posting or replying to someone. There is a clear difference between constructive criticism/discussion and just plain being rude and insulting. https://www.registertovote.service.gov.uk |
On February 15 2018 23:38 kollin wrote:Show nested quote +On February 15 2018 22:33 sc-darkness wrote:
Well, my opinion is valuable. If yours is worthless, then that's your problem. Once again, I call you a bitter socialist who wants to silence anyone with a different opinion. Learn what freedom of speech is. Learn to respect others if you want to be respected. Until you learn how to respond respectfully, I will continue to reply to your comments reciprocally.
There is a warning on top of this thread. Read it and follow it if you want to have a meaningful discussion in the future, whether it's with me or someone else. Not all opinions are born equal. I'm not denying your freedom of speech, I'm not disrespecting you, but I have absolutely no respect towards your opinion on privatisation of railways. It is clearly an opinion formed from ideology and assumption, and one that does not reflect the reality of privatisation in Britain (if you would also take a look at the top of this thread, you will notice it's for discussion surrounding the UK).
Here is more meaningful discussion then: why didn't it work in the UK? What needed to be negotiated better? If Japan really has private railway, why is it used as an example of success when compared to the one in the UK?
|
Gorsameth explained it to you on page 409.
|
On February 16 2018 01:47 sc-darkness wrote:Show nested quote +On February 15 2018 23:38 kollin wrote:On February 15 2018 22:33 sc-darkness wrote:
Well, my opinion is valuable. If yours is worthless, then that's your problem. Once again, I call you a bitter socialist who wants to silence anyone with a different opinion. Learn what freedom of speech is. Learn to respect others if you want to be respected. Until you learn how to respond respectfully, I will continue to reply to your comments reciprocally.
There is a warning on top of this thread. Read it and follow it if you want to have a meaningful discussion in the future, whether it's with me or someone else. Not all opinions are born equal. I'm not denying your freedom of speech, I'm not disrespecting you, but I have absolutely no respect towards your opinion on privatisation of railways. It is clearly an opinion formed from ideology and assumption, and one that does not reflect the reality of privatisation in Britain (if you would also take a look at the top of this thread, you will notice it's for discussion surrounding the UK). Here is more meaningful discussion then: why didn't it work in the UK? What needed to be negotiated better? If Japan really has private railway, why is it used as an example of success when compared to the one in the UK?
If it really interests you why have you not spend 5 minutes to find the answer yourself online.
+ Show Spoiler +Only urban centers in Japan are privatized. High volume, low area traffic where there is lots of profit and the price of competing is (relatively) low.
Japan's rural railsystem is still publicly owned because volume is to low and the distances are to long for it to be appealing for private companies. So the government takes care of it at a low profit or loss because such lines existing is in the publics interest.
|
Most public transit in the US works the same way. The cities have it, and anything outside the city is private and pretty garbage. Our train system is pure shit because we favor cars and it would never be profitable. It might be super efficient
and helpful to the public to have both rail and roads, but it wouldn't make anyone money. And profit is the metric for success that Americans care about. So if you want terrible public transit, be like America.
|
On February 16 2018 02:50 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On February 16 2018 01:47 sc-darkness wrote:On February 15 2018 23:38 kollin wrote:On February 15 2018 22:33 sc-darkness wrote:
Well, my opinion is valuable. If yours is worthless, then that's your problem. Once again, I call you a bitter socialist who wants to silence anyone with a different opinion. Learn what freedom of speech is. Learn to respect others if you want to be respected. Until you learn how to respond respectfully, I will continue to reply to your comments reciprocally.
There is a warning on top of this thread. Read it and follow it if you want to have a meaningful discussion in the future, whether it's with me or someone else. Not all opinions are born equal. I'm not denying your freedom of speech, I'm not disrespecting you, but I have absolutely no respect towards your opinion on privatisation of railways. It is clearly an opinion formed from ideology and assumption, and one that does not reflect the reality of privatisation in Britain (if you would also take a look at the top of this thread, you will notice it's for discussion surrounding the UK). Here is more meaningful discussion then: why didn't it work in the UK? What needed to be negotiated better? If Japan really has private railway, why is it used as an example of success when compared to the one in the UK? If it really interests you why have you not spend 5 minutes to find the answer yourself online. + Show Spoiler +Only urban centers in Japan are privatized. High volume, low area traffic where there is lots of profit and the price of competing is (relatively) low.
Japan's rural railsystem is still publicly owned because volume is to low and the distances are to long for it to be appealing for private companies. So the government takes care of it at a low profit or loss because such lines existing is in the publics interest.
Maybe the UK should try this instead?
|
The problem is, once you privatised its hard to go back and it actually screams communism.
|
On February 16 2018 03:19 Velr wrote:
The problem is, once you privatised its hard to go back and it actually screams communism.
Only for people who are so terrified of any nationalized service that they have forgotten how to think.
A failing public service like railways where performance is getting worse and worse while prices continue to skyrocket needs fixing. Even temporary nationalization is the best means of getting a handle of an industry that's out of control.
|
I'm not sure about temporary nationalisation. Some politician quoted some huge amount (billions) to renationalise services. Nationalising unprofitable areas is such a small task in comparison that it should be doable.
|
On February 15 2018 05:58 sc-darkness wrote:
No, I'm not insane but you clearly can't read. What did I deny?
I posted your quotes.
You just wrote that you didn't write those posts.
I point out that it would be insane, when they are clearly quoted and labelled.
You ask what you have denied...
Well that will be your own quoted posts.
Then you write that you didn't deny you wrote your own posts.
So again, I have to ask. are you insane? Why would you deny posting those very same quotes? Why should anyone talk to you in good faith when you repeatedly write that you didn't write those posts to one person, then to another that you did write it and that you did not deny writing those posts.
|
Are you a strawman? I don't even know what you're trying to achieve but cause arguments. From now I'll just ignore your posts.
|
Good good, you do that. You do know that you don't have to declare that you are ignoring someone to ignore them right?
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43073382
![[image loading]](https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/6404/production/_100040652_jmp_justice4grenfell_20.jpg)
Its important to remember that almost no positive steps have been taken since this disaster. Most of the buildings that were covered in firelighter cladding still are and the ones that are ready to change are being told the residents have to foot the bill.
No discernible change is taking place in class culture and there is absolutely no sign of anything approaching justice for the victims, most of whom still don't have permanent housing.
|
On February 16 2018 03:19 Velr wrote:
The problem is, once you privatised its hard to go back and it actually screams communism.
This is incorrect. These lines are sold to private companies freehold. They're licenses to them on a contract with a renewal/end date. They can be brougt in-house at the end of the contract, or even purchased back from the operator.
Don't portray re-nationalisation as some kind of violence seizure of private property.
Private companies wouldn't want the liability anyway. PFIs were created to benefit companies while mitigating the risks.
|
On February 16 2018 05:14 Jockmcplop wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43073382Its important to remember that almost no positive steps have been taken since this disaster. Most of the buildings that were covered in firelighter cladding still are and the ones that are ready to change are being told the residents have to foot the bill. No discernible change is taking place in class culture and there is absolutely no sign of anything approaching justice for the victims, most of whom still don't have permanent housing.
RIP to victims of Grenfell Tower. Unfortunately, it just confirms some of my experience from the UK that some people do things as cheap as possible, then real price comes later. My privately rented flat had a bathroom with NO tiles on the floor. Wall wasn't completely tiled either. If you ask someone else from Europe, they'll tell you that's crazy in a wet environment like bathrooms. Oh, I forgot to say floor was just vinyl. Material like that: http://www.zebra.pk/web/image/2171
But what does this have to do with Grenfell Tower? Well, as I said, it seems to me that quite a lot of people (not everyone, of course) tries to cut costs at the expense of the end user. Profit before people. Ironic when I spoke about privatisation earlier, right? Yes, but this is another topic. I'd just say there is proper privatisation and improper privatisation like BT which I mentioned before. Either way, let's not discuss that topic once again.
Maybe it's a culture problem to think that costs could be cut and that you could forget about the long-term. Don't know for sure. I didn't live in the UK all my life.
|
I wasn't trying to tie this in to privatization per se, but i guess it is related.
I would think the powers that be might want to at least look like they are trying to get some justice for the bereaved families, traumatized victims etc. of this disaster, but in true tory form they don't even care about looking like they care.
Fuck em, because they are poor is the attitude, and it might make successive governments look quite bad if a proper inquiry was to happen, where the victims have a say in the direction of the investigation.
|
Yeah, cuts at the cost of safety is dumb. I agree with you. I only mentioned privatisation because I thought some strawman would find the tiniest detail to criticise me when I was talking about cuts.
|
On February 16 2018 07:51 Jockmcplop wrote:
I wasn't trying to tie this in to privatization per se, but i guess it is related.
I would think the powers that be might want to at least look like they are trying to get some justice for the bereaved families, traumatized victims etc. of this disaster, but in true tory form they don't even care about looking like they care.
Fuck em, because they are poor is the attitude, and it might make successive governments look quite bad if a proper inquiry was to happen, where the victims have a say in the direction of the investigation.
We don't really have a functioning civil society any more. Or.. well that's probably a bit much, but it's in tatters.
Local councils have, over successive generations, been crippled - with their ability to raise revenue and chose what to spend it on gutted - and this latest round of really brutal cuts is just disintegrating services.
Schools and hospitals have become profit making entities, in the form of trusts and academies. I don't have much experience of hospitals but seeing how a secondary school in a deprived area functions from the inside would make anyone, with any sense of what education is, weep.
Trains, buses, water, power, telecoms, post, all run in order to enrich shareholders and management. Cut corners, run up prices, avoid investment, unless the public are paying.
Our press is genuinely awful, whether it's the local papers - owned by 4 or 5 giant companies, filled with ads, next to no coverage of local government - or the national press which are either organs run by fanatics using blackmail to gain power or lettuce limp "progressives" who cry a bit, but would rather die than fight for change because well... what would HSBC think?
The banks, in fact the financial sector as a whole, is pretty much the world's money launderer. Fat morons exploit the worlds most vulnerable and impoverished so they can climb a greasy pole to a 7 figure salary with stock options all the while convinced that they are helping because err... markets or something, where as they are a drag on the real economy, draining talent and fiddling markets legally and illegally, pocketing the profit then jumping out just before the crash.
The police are being starved of funds and the courts are, through attacks on the law society and the gutting of legal aid, becoming places where the rich can settle arguments with one another and occasionally crucify a pleb.
Why is there no justice for Grenfell? Why are the vast majority of other tower block fire traps unchanged?
Because the only voices in the UK that matter are those of the rich who want to get richer and no ones going to make a buck off fixing it. Because we have a budget driven by an ideology that's been debunked time and again strangling our country for the benefit of a few at the cost of the many. Because our press is as diverse as penguin colony and owned by corporations, tycoons and the landed gentry almost none of whom could give the slightest fuck.
|
On February 15 2018 23:07 LegalLord wrote:
If bardtown did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him.
Otherwise who else is there for us to direct strawmanned up grievances against?
I feel as if I missed something wonderful and horrible. Who is this Lovecraftian abomination that you name 'bardtown'?
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On February 18 2018 01:54 iamthedave wrote:Show nested quote +On February 15 2018 23:07 LegalLord wrote:
If bardtown did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him.
Otherwise who else is there for us to direct strawmanned up grievances against? I feel as if I missed something wonderful and horrible. Who is this Lovecraftian abomination that you name 'bardtown'?
The only pro-Brexit individual who posted around these parts until he decided he was no longer interested. Without him, what we have is little more than an echo chamber on the issue desperately begging for a contrary opinion.
|
On February 16 2018 09:03 Dapper_Cad wrote:Show nested quote +On February 16 2018 07:51 Jockmcplop wrote:
I wasn't trying to tie this in to privatization per se, but i guess it is related.
I would think the powers that be might want to at least look like they are trying to get some justice for the bereaved families, traumatized victims etc. of this disaster, but in true tory form they don't even care about looking like they care.
Fuck em, because they are poor is the attitude, and it might make successive governments look quite bad if a proper inquiry was to happen, where the victims have a say in the direction of the investigation. We don't really have a functioning civil society any more. Or.. well that's probably a bit much, but it's in tatters. Local councils have, over successive generations, been crippled - with their ability to raise revenue and chose what to spend it on gutted - and this latest round of really brutal cuts is just disintegrating services. Schools and hospitals have become profit making entities, in the form of trusts and academies. I don't have much experience of hospitals but seeing how a secondary school in a deprived area functions from the inside would make anyone, with any sense of what education is, weep. Trains, buses, water, power, telecoms, post, all run in order to enrich shareholders and management. Cut corners, run up prices, avoid investment, unless the public are paying. Our press is genuinely awful, whether it's the local papers - owned by 4 or 5 giant companies, filled with ads, next to no coverage of local government - or the national press which are either organs run by fanatics using blackmail to gain power or lettuce limp "progressives" who cry a bit, but would rather die than fight for change because well... what would HSBC think? The banks, in fact the financial sector as a whole, is pretty much the world's money launderer. Fat morons exploit the worlds most vulnerable and impoverished so they can climb a greasy pole to a 7 figure salary with stock options all the while convinced that they are helping because err... markets or something, where as they are a drag on the real economy, draining talent and fiddling markets legally and illegally, pocketing the profit then jumping out just before the crash. The police are being starved of funds and the courts are, through attacks on the law society and the gutting of legal aid, becoming places where the rich can settle arguments with one another and occasionally crucify a pleb. Why is there no justice for Grenfell? Why are the vast majority of other tower block fire traps unchanged? Because the only voices in the UK that matter are those of the rich who want to get richer and no ones going to make a buck off fixing it. Because we have a budget driven by an ideology that's been debunked time and again strangling our country for the benefit of a few at the cost of the many. Because our press is as diverse as penguin colony and owned by corporations, tycoons and the landed gentry almost none of whom could give the slightest fuck.
Come on, now, we're not America.
On February 18 2018 02:03 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On February 18 2018 01:54 iamthedave wrote:On February 15 2018 23:07 LegalLord wrote:
If bardtown did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him.
Otherwise who else is there for us to direct strawmanned up grievances against? I feel as if I missed something wonderful and horrible. Who is this Lovecraftian abomination that you name 'bardtown'? The only pro-Brexit individual who posted around these parts until he decided he was no longer interested. Without him, what we have is little more than an echo chamber on the issue desperately begging for a contrary opinion.
I can fill the shoes a bit. I did vote to remain, but not for many of the reasons people voted, and I've always been able to see why people want to leave. Come at meh.
The problem is that Brexit is increasingly hard to defend or promote because it's being handled very poorly. Which everyone sensible predicted from the get-go, and I was very concerned about due to the nature of the campaign leading up to it. Had it been run differently I might have voted leave.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
